Horse Gone, Closing Barn Door

[ajax13]

AARC is in deep shit, and they know it.  That's why, after years they suddenly began listing the consulting professionals such as Choda on their organization page.  This development has only taken place in the last few months, in spite of the fact that Choda has been wetting his beak in the AARC trough for years and years.  Likewise the degenerate old Dr. Stanhopeless.  AARC is going to have to explain how they charge $50 000 to have people like Andy Evans and the three stooges Natalie Oldcomer, Lyin' Brian Campbell, and Gonewaydown Brown oversee Synanon group attacks on helpless teenagers.  
It is also a new development for AARC to try to spin the fact that the Wiz stole the entire AARC program from Kids.  AARC is now lying about it's real link to Kids.  
Let's see how believable this story is:
"Dean Vause worked at Kids, but thought it was really bad.  No, I don't know why he was there for months and months.  No, I can't explain why a real Social Worker like Sandi Levy Barbero left after four days and alerted the authorities.  No, I don't know why Vause stayed for so long in spite of the fact that it was immediately apparent that Kids was a fundamentally lawless and very harmful enterprise."
"RK Dougan and Jim Dinning visited Kids and also thought it was really bad.  They wanted a completely different approach to treating adolescent addiction.  No, I can't explain how Dougan's organization, the Rotary Club, gave $600 000 to open Kids of the Canadian West after Dougan returned from Kids.  No, I don't know how to explain why the Alberta Government also gave $600 000 to Kids of the Canadian West after Dinning returned from New Jersey."
"No, I can't explain why Kids was still fighting for a license in Alberta one year after Dinning and Dougan returned from Kids."
"No, I can't explain why anyone chose to hire Dean Vause when he was not a psychologist, nor a medical doctor, and had been involved with Miller Newton and Kids."
"No, I don't know why so many people involved with Kids ended up involved with AARC."
"No, I don't know what qualified Dean Vause to run AARC.  Yes, I know that he was a phys ed teacher and school guidance counselor prior to opening AARC.  Yes, I know that he obtained his PhD several years after opening AARC."  
"No, I don't know why anyone claimed that AARC was unique or a novel form of treatment.  Yes, I know that the raps, the program verncacular, the use of host homes, the use of peer counselors, and many other aspects of AARC's program were identical to Kids and Straight."
"No, I don't know why it costs $50 000 per year to keep a person in AARC.  Yes, I know that the residential costs are shifted onto the families who are already paying the client fees.  Yes, I know that the staff is composed of Peer Counselors and the unlicensed former Peer Counselors who have become clinicals.  No, I don't know what the money is used for if not for professional staff and services."

[TheWho]

The 50,000 question I can answer.  AARC doesnt set the price, the people do.  It is simple supply and demand.  If they charged $1,000 a person they would have a line up the street.  If they charged $100,000 a person very few would sign up.  Right now $50,000 is enough to keep it to capacity.  If the economy tanks it may drop off to $40,000.  In better times it may increase to $60,000.  All depends on how much people are willing to pay year to year.

[Anonymous]

AARC is in deep shit, and they know it.

And you know this because you have crystal ball? the only 'shite stinkin is yer own buddy' !

That's why, after years they suddenly began listing the consulting professionals such as Choda on their organization page.  

oh, oh oh, let me get this stright -  they should really apologize to YOU? because they didn't put focus on IT and webpage development. Of course you would know where they should put their foucs . . .  roflmao. The world rotates around Greg elliot and what he thinks is right and just  . .  how the rig pig with a poli sci degree who knows more thatn professionals in their area should run a treatment centre  . . oh we all should bow dowen before the expert, AJAX13 the caped . .fool  roflmao again . . .

anyway lets continue through your drivel . .

This development has only taken place in the last few months, in spite of the fact that Choda has been wetting his beak in the AARC trough for years and years.

 

es and that in in your mind and perception only, you do realize . . .  not likely  but what the hell just pointing out THE FACTS

Likewise the degenerate old Dr. Stanhopeless.  AARC is going to have to explain how they charge $50 000 to have people like Andy Evans and the three stooges Natalie Oldcomer, Lyin' Brian Campbell, and Gonewaydown Brown oversee Synanon group attacks on helpless teenagers.  

Everyone associated eith AARC is so below you aren't they. They should really get a ife, adopt a sick GF, study the dictionary and spend you life trying to take down a person (Vause) and institution (AARC) because you think you know everything about it.  roflmao . . but lets continue through the drivel for fun and amusment hehe

It is also a new development for AARC to try to spin the fact that the Wiz stole the entire AARC program from Kids.  AARC is now lying about it's real link to Kids.

REally!! how so MR smarty pants elliot

Let's see how believable this story is:

 

trust it won't be because you haven't a clue roflmao some more

"Dean Vause worked at Kids, but thought it was really bad.  No, I don't know why he was there for months and months.

And Mr.brian-the-size-of-lentil  read these details in "the funny paper"s, which he likes to refer Josh Penner to all the time!!  
REad on for more non-factual information and if you are real astute you will buy into like others have. . . not people that actually count but their are those wholike to be conned to belie GE et.al.

No, I can't explain why a real Social Worker like Sandi Levy Barbero left after four days and alerted the authorities.  No, I don't know why Vause stayed for so long in spite of the fact that it was immediately apparent that Kids was a fundamentally lawless and very harmful enterprise."
"RK Dougan and Jim Dinning visited Kids and also thought it was really bad.  They wanted a completely different approach to treating adolescent addiction.  No, I can't explain how Dougan's organization, the Rotary Club, gave $600 000 to open Kids of the Canadian West after Dougan returned from Kids.  No, I don't know how to explain why the Alberta Government also gave $600 000 to Kids of the Canadian West after Dinning returned from New Jersey."
"No, I can't explain why Kids was still fighting for a license in Alberta one year after Dinning and Dougan returned from Kids."
"No, I can't explain why anyone chose to hire Dean Vause when he was not a psychologist, nor a medical doctor, and had been involved with Miller Newton and Kids."
"No, I don't know why so many people involved with Kids ended up involved with AARC."
"No, I don't know what qualified Dean Vause to run AARC.  Yes, I know that he was a phys ed teacher and school guidance counselor prior to opening AARC.  Yes, I know that he obtained his PhD several years after opening AARC."  
"No, I don't know why anyone claimed that AARC was unique or a novel form of treatment.  Yes, I know that the raps, the program verncacular, the use of host homes, the use of peer counselors, and many other aspects of AARC's program were identical to Kids and Straight."
"No, I don't know why it costs $50 000 per year to keep a person in AARC.  Yes, I know that the residential costs are shifted onto the families who are already paying the client fees.  Yes, I know that the staff is composed of Peer Counselors and the unlicensed former Peer Counselors who have become clinicals.  No, I don't know what the money is used for if not for professional staff and services.

Sorry to inform you - your sources are lacking in facts but keep singing your songs . .  it is obvious you will continue incessantly. when you hit 60-70 yrrs old are ya still going to be harping. Incidentally, I was talking to Vause lately and he sure enjoys his family and friends and his life.  Also, one of largest reasons I would never believe what you have to say is because you are certain and try to protray Vause as someone who is all about the money and/or power or notoriety. Those things ARE the FURTHEST things from the trth of what motivates. Helping kids and families has ALWAYS been his motivator, hence he has an awesome family and MANY friends and supporters. Can you say the same for yourself??

PS andthe bit about him not playing top level junior hockey rates as truly the most hilarious so-called fact you like to trot out . . thanks for the belly laugh, Laughing is so good for a person.

[ajax13]

$50 000 is not a price set by the market.  AARC does not charge a fee that is met by market demand.  AARC takes in most of it's funds from charity donations and government grants.  The marks who pay are told that $50 000 is the rate, but it is not a consumer decision to pay this amount.  
You seem to know who I am, but I have no idea which of the deranged sad-sack dupes you are.  By all means, feel free to tell me your name and what your connection is to AARC.  I realize that when you've been a supporter or employee of a cult that stole millions of dollars from charities, the government and naive parents, you're probably a little nervous about revealing yourself, but it's okay.  When everybody runs for cover they'll have to pin it all on the Wiz, and you'll be okay.

[TheWho]

No, "you" do not understand.  AARC does not set the rate, the consumer does.  If what you say is true they could ask $1,000,000 per person and get rich even quicker.  But no one would pay that so the price is set at an amount that the consumer is willing to pay, no more no less.

[ajax13]

No, sadly, charities and government delivering millions of dollars in lump sums are not consumers choosing to pay for services.  The Wiz and minions derive a figure, in this case a day rate of $150.  The client families do not make a decision to pay this rate and then provide the funds.  Rather, the Wiz simply presents this figure as justification for the slush he receives.  The notion that individual consumers choose to pay $150 per day to have their children subjected to the bizarre blandishments of the likes of AARC peer counselors is so far removed from reality as to hardly bear consideration.

[TheWho]

No, "you" do not understand.  AARC does not set the rate, the consumer does.  If what you say is true they could ask $1,000,000 per person and get rich even quicker.  But no one would pay that so the price is set at an amount that the consumer is willing to pay, no more no less.

If they had the same set up in the states it would be much more.  I think they can get by on that amount because they are in Canada.

[ajax13]

Since the Canadian dollar is valued lower than the American dollar, it makes no sense to say that it would cost more in the United States. $40 975 is the US$ value of $50 000 CDN.    This is signifigantly more than PFC, a virtually identical program to AARC, charges.  Like AARC however, PFC day rates do not reflect a nexus of supply and demand.  PFC amassed funds at a much higher rate than the rate at which client services grew.  The stated fee amounts reflect only what the programs feel they can get away with.  AARC, a renamed Kids franchise, and PFC, a renamed Straight franchise, both exist to amass funds.  The dispensing of monies for client services is only incidental, and not a determining factor in the money taken in.  AARC, or All About Receiving Cash, and PFC, Purely For Cash, rip off as much as they can get.  .

[TheWho]

One reason AARC has been successful in their fund raising (and government funding) has been their ability to keep their costs low and still be able to demonstrate a high rate of effectiveness and success.

http://http://www.drug-alcohol-rehabs.org/drug-rehab-cost.html

From the National Substance Abuse Treatment Services Survey (N-SATSS), the average cost for inpatient programs was about $7,000 per month. Since more than 30 days produces a higher recovery rate, the cost of drug rehab can easily go between $10,000 and $40,000. While it may not be easy for many people to just write a check for that amount, you have to consider all that goes into getting you or your loved one well again, and be thankful it's not as expensive as hospital stays (which can run $2,000 per day).

[Anonymous]

One reason AARC has been successful in their fund raising (and government funding) has been their ability to keep their costs low and still be able to demonstrate a high rate of effectiveness and success.

http://http://www.drug-alcohol-rehabs.org/drug-rehab-cost.html

From the National Substance Abuse Treatment Services Survey (N-SATSS), the average cost for inpatient programs was about $7,000 per month. Since more than 30 days produces a higher recovery rate, the cost of drug rehab can easily go between $10,000 and $40,000. While it may not be easy for many people to just write a check for that amount, you have to consider all that goes into getting you or your loved one well again, and be thankful it's not as expensive as hospital stays (which can run $2,000 per day).

How did they show High effectiveness?

[TheWho]

One reason AARC has been successful in their fund raising (and government funding) has been their ability to keep their costs low and still be able to demonstrate a high rate of effectiveness and success.

http://http://www.drug-alcohol-rehabs.org/drug-rehab-cost.html

From the National Substance Abuse Treatment Services Survey (N-SATSS), the average cost for inpatient programs was about $7,000 per month. Since more than 30 days produces a higher recovery rate, the cost of drug rehab can easily go between $10,000 and $40,000. While it may not be easy for many people to just write a check for that amount, you have to consider all that goes into getting you or your loved one well again, and be thankful it's not as expensive as hospital stays (which can run $2,000 per day).

How did they show High effectiveness?

I always thought AARC was around 60% effective like all the other places.  But a few months back Ajax showed us a study where they measured it out to be 85 – 90% still clean after 4 years or something like that.  All as I know is it was really high.  The original study was released to the public.  Maybe Ajax13 will re post it again.
That combined with their low cost is probably why they receive so much in donations and government money, as ajax pointed out earlier.

[Anonymous]

You seem to know who I am, but I have no idea which of the deranged sad-sack dupes you are.  

uhm  . . . . you and your sick 'partner' have provided extensive details of who you both are on this site and elsewhere. you have also id'd and made many desparaging remarks about any person affliated and remotely affliated with AARC or anyone that you have written to about AARC. no one has escaped your petty childish rants and the misfit type judgments you like to extoll. YEs, your identity and views have been well laid out for all to read and  yes it is obvious you want people to know who you are. So, what is the problem Greg? who i am is really inconsequential isn't it. you refuse to accept facts, make all your own warped interpretations of reality about AARC and keep asserting that you will single-handedly take AARC down and/or are in the process of that. If in fact AARC had antyhing to worry about and you were able to snag a journalist - I am sure Vause would like a less labour intensive lifestyle. You just can't accept that the fact of the matter is that he is anything BUT a psychopath, liar or dictator. He is a hard-working dedicated person that cares deeply about contributing in society and has been irregardless of what your deranged little group of whiners want to portray.

So, about other things - you really need to grow up at some point in your life, this is the typical crap you spew

deranged sad-sack dupes  

 Your poor son. I hope his mother has the greater amount of custody time with the poor kid :clown: .  Exposure to you and SLF is dangerous and he may have a chance  if the other parent gets more time with him. However, you have already proved a clear lack of judgement when selecting GFs . . . . so strike the last comment -  the kid hasn't a fair chance and will likely be as useless as you have been described by your SLF to be - only going by what CL wrote on you on Fornits not any conjecture, Greg buddy.

[ajax13]

I don't know whether the Wiz would like a less labor intensive lifestyle.  It takes work to manipulate people in order to defraud charities and government agencies, along with vulnerable parents.  If leisure time was what the Wiz wanted, he shouldn't have set up a cult posing as a treatment centre.  Life is full of hard choices.  Parents who chose to give their children and their money to a cult like AARC have to live with those choices.  Likewise, people who were given to AARC as kids and decided to perpetuate the abuse by working in AARC also have to live with their choices.  I feel fortunate to have been neither a parent who sold out their child by giving him to a deviant con artist like the Wiz, nor a blindly obedient follower of such a deviant like the staff at AARC.
Truly, I am blessed.

[TheWho]

This has been a good thread, so AARC is more legitimate than I thought.  I always viewed them as a hole in the wall place that over charged people and abused kids.  But someone (I think it was ajax)  brought to light that they are recognized by and getting money from charities and various government agencies?  Is this really true?  Taking money from government agencies and charities opens them up to public exposure so they must be on the up and up somewhat more than I thought.  If they were shady they would be taking only private funding to avoid having to open their books.
Does anyone have the study that was talked about earlier?  AARC might be getting a bad rap here.  Anyone else?

[ajax13]

Odd that it would be new information to a poster who knew even the first thing about AARC that All About Receiving Cash receives most of it's funding from charities and government grants.  After all, it has no license for it's treatment centre.  The only license it has is as a charity.  It would be very strange indeed if AARC did not receive charity money, since it's only official oversight is as a registered charity.  As far as providing psychological treatment though to vulnerable adolescents, no license, no professional staff.  As AARC is simply a coerced entry into AA, which is free, one would logically think that AARC would be, like AA, free.  In fact, for AARC to charge anything to the client families, who provide the residential facilities so that AARC can avoid having to meet the criteria of a residential program and also pay the residential costs, is very strange.  Why does AARC in fact charge anything?  They received $1 200 000 twenty years ago.  That should have gone a long way to paying for the old warehouse on Forge Rd.  So again, since AARC employs the three amateur stooges and amateur peer counselors to oversee the groups, where does all that money go?  There are of course, no doctors on staff, nor psychologists.  Just a few consultants, such as Dr. GoldenarmStanhopeless and Pete Choda.  So again, one is left asking where does all the money go?  One clue may be the number of lawyers AARC regularly offers up as a threat against those who disagree with their $50 000 AA program and the amateur jailing system of Newcomers that accompanies it.  
The folks behind AARC have known all along that AARC was set up directly to avoid complying with any legal standards for facilities providing medical treatment, and that eventually the charade would end up in court.